Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
. >> bill clinton was worried about deficits. be obama is increasing spending. he wants tax credits and spending subsidies. >> this is not what with tax cuts to higher people -- >> i will ask you about when he talks about energy he is not talking about fraking or shale. he is talking about more green energy spending. that's the difference between him and clinton. >> appreciate that. what i'm saying is if you don't like the same as it ever was, let's have a conversation about the bush years if we are going to talk about what worked and didn't work, bush's policies did not work. if you don't believe me, look at the 4.5 million jobs. >> what do you mean? >> 2008 until january 2009, we lost 4.5 million jobs. >> do you know over the same time span that bush created more jobs. the bush recovery created more jobs than the obama -- >> what was -- >> even though the recession was much milder,crea more jobs than obama did. using the obama metric. listen, i know this is stunning because you watch the democratic national convention and heard those numbers over and other own. over the same time
obama did get a bill passed very early -- >> well, he had both sides on his side, right? for the first two years of his presidency, he had all in, you know? he had the leadership in terms of the democratic side, house and senate. so how is it possible that he didn't get more done when he had both sides of the aisle in his corner? >> if you let me finish, he did get a big stimulus bill passed, i would say within 6 to 12 months of taking office, the president's hand starts being felt on the economy. as you go through the four-year term, it then depends how big a problem you're dealing with. we were not dealing in early 2009 with the problems that are going to go away in one year or two years if super man was president. it was not going to be fixed in four years. by the way, i don't think he communicated that as well as he should have. to the american public. >> is there any evidence of business experience failing in the white house? >> well, there's herbert hoover. the best businessman to ascend to the white house was herbert hoover, by a margin. i wouldn't consider him a very successful
in congress. they never proposed an obama care bill, it was written in congress. dodd/frank was written in congress. i think the administration, the role of the executive is to send down a piece of legislation that is an anchor that doesn't let things go too far one way or the other. and i think their mistake in their first two years when they had overwhelming majorities was the administration never laid down an anchor. >> do you think they've learned from those mistakes? >> never in history has a second term been better than a first term. and i think that's important to keep in mind. >> whoa, whoa. clinton. >> well, president clinton's, remember the budget deal was signed in the first term. but the second term was dominated by impeachment. >> the tabloids would say the second term was much better. i'm sorry. you get into the stock picks when we come back, we're going to do that. we're going to have to go right to you. you ready? you got them? >> i'm ready. >> what do you got? one stock pick, two? >> lots of stocks all around the world. >> coming up, we're going to tell you what you sho
to bash banks and that is as phony as a $3 bill. also a judge strikes down pennsylvania's voter id law and the obama administration is telling companies it is okay to disregard the law when it comes to handing out pink slips in advance to big budget cuts. all three happening before the election. mitt romney has finally put meat on the bones of his tax reform idea. he floated the idea of a $17,000 cap on tax reform reduction. >> you could say everyone is going to get up to a $17,000 deduction. you can fill that bucket if you will and higher income people might have a lower number. >> this is brand new stuff. we have howard dean former vermont governor and candidate. and let's look at this for a second. what do you think? a $17,000 cap on tax deductions for everybody as a way of being fair because the upper end would pay more. what do you think? >> i don't have a problem with the eidea of deductions. here you are. you guys are talking about the private sector all the time. so, i've been convinced because of the high rate of canadian home ownership, i'm not convinced of doing away with ch
. first he's got to find a way to dent the argument that bill clinton and barack obama made at the democratic convention about how president obama's done as well as anyone could do in turning the economy around the last four years. secondly, he's got to make a positive case with passion, with credibility for his own economic plans, for how he's going to make life better for 100% of americans. third, he's going to have to deal with that 47% video which has really taken a toll on his campaign. he's got to do all those things at the same time. we've seen the history of debates, tyler. it is not easy to fundamentally turn a race around but we have seen from our nbc/"wall street journal" poll that he's within three points nationally. still possible for him to win. got get going down. >> amman, there is some buzz about a plan that romney hs apparently floated for basically a $17,000 cap on tax deductions for americans. explain it. you've crunched the number. what's the headline here? >> tyler, the headline here is that the romney campaign e-mailed me this morning on this. they say
's got to hurt obama and help himself. >> president obama has to make the case how he's going to help americans in the next four years. we haven't heard the specifics of his plan in terms of economic growth and getting jobs created. >> bill clinton may have given the most effective speep so far, but that's contingent on giving the president four more years. saying you can't fix this in four years. we'll see if the president can build on that tonight. >> now let's turn it over to jim lehrer for presidential debate number one. beginning in seconds. >>> on the university of denver in denver, california. i'm jim lehrer of the pbs news hour. i welcome you to the first of the 2012 presidential debates between president barack obama the democratic nominee and former massachusetts governor mitt romney the republican nominee. this debate and the next three, two presidential, one vice presidential, are sponsored by the commission on presidential debates. tonight's 90 minutes will be about domestic issues. and will follow a format designed by the commission. there will be six, roughly 15-minute
leadership. we know the stimulus bill is just sent down to nancy pelosi and she wrote it. president had no input. dodd-frank same thing, obama care similar. there's this cadre of people writing the laws of our country without input from at least half the country. >> what's the most important thing you think needs to be tackled head on. you think the fiscal cliff is the first issue? >> there are a multiple of issues that have to be acted on and obviously the fiscal cliff is a very important one. the trouble is the fiscal cliff is probably too easy to solve and kick down the road, and so therefore i doubt we would be in the fiscal cliff. i'm not sure, to be honest with you, that a fiscal cliff falling off the edge is not exactly what america needs. >> is this a wake-up call do you think at this point? it's a pretty severe wake-up call to get. >> you're describing a wake-up call to rip van winkle. how many years have we been kicking the khan down the road. that's a wake-up call for rip van winkle, somebody who has been sleeping for a multitude of years. >> you're suggesting play with fire
a bill to fix it. representative tim griffin is with us, a republican from arkansas. he joins me now. thank you so much for joining us. this came before president obama, but it's known as the obama phone. why? >> well, what has happened is this program has ballooned, and now it's costing you and me and people who have cell phones over $1 billion a year. there's several issues here. the first issue is the waste, fraud, and abuse in this program. some folks are getting 10, 20, 30, 40 cell phones, they're selling them, bartering with them. but the broader issue is, where does the federal government draw the line on providing things to people? do we need to give people computers? do we need to give them ipads? i mean, you know, this raises the fund amental question of where we draw the line. i don't think the government ought to be providing cell phones, smart phones, blackberries. >> it's extraordinary, congressman. so tell us how it works. why is the president giving these phones to low-income people, and how come the costs have exploded so much? >> well, here's the deal. this is a lif
it to 23.8, now you know, obama surprised everyone by saying i don't want preference on the dividend tax but the reality is that most democrats actually do want the dividend tax to be lower and there's bills to mabke it half of the regular tax, bills to make it 20%, again, also subject to the 3.8, which again only kicks in that high income levels, it's not across the board. so i say worse case scenario is really 23.8% for both the dividends of capital gains, certainly -- >> even simpson-bowles would tax it as ordinary income which is what we had in 1986 and that's a higher level. >> right, that brief time under reagan where we did get down to virtually a simpson-bowles solution back then, didn't keep it for very long. don't forget there's going to -- simpson-bowles is still a long way off. i'm not saying that the congress doesn't want to get together. >> if you're talking more than simpson-bowles you can look at the rivlin-domenici plan, but you have to look at things both sides of the aisle hate and mash them together to get the programs passed. >> absolutely. i think what the market is
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9